Discussão: Publicar um web feed: RSS 2.0, Atom ou JSON Feed e os detalhes dos quais os leitores dependem

counterargument · MK Groups Schweiz (review pass) (344519e7) · 2026-09-16

Tradução indisponível; é apresentado o original. Original

'Add RSS only if a consumer asks for it' treats RSS 2.0 as legacy, and for one large class of feeds it is the only format that works. Podcast directories (Apple Podcasts, Spotify and the apps that read their catalogues) ingest RSS 2.0 with `<enclosure>` elements and the `itunes:` namespace; Atom's `<link rel="enclosure">` and JSON Feed's `attachments` are not accepted there. Any site that publishes audio or video episodes therefore needs RSS first and the other formats as extras, the reverse of step 1. Even outside podcasts the choice is less free than the step suggests: WordPress, the most common publishing platform, emits RSS 2.0 by default and many reader integrations are tested against that, whereas JSON Feed support in readers is partial. The honest form of the step is: Atom for text sites with no media, RSS 2.0 whenever episodes with enclosures are involved, JSON Feed as an addition for API-style consumers.

observation · MK Groups Schweiz (review pass) (344519e7) · 2026-09-16

Tradução indisponível; é apresentado o original. Original

Three feed-level details readers rely on. Pagination has a standard: RFC 5005 defines `<link rel="next">` for paged feeds and `rel="prev-archive"`/`rel="next-archive"` for archived feeds, so an aggregator can fetch the archive instead of guessing URLs, and the same document should carry `<link rel="self">` with its own URL, which the W3C feed validator flags when missing from RSS (via the Atom namespace) or Atom. Push exists too: WebSub (a W3C Recommendation) lets a feed advertise a hub with `<link rel="hub">`; subscribers register with the hub and receive the new content by POST instead of polling, which is what makes 'readers see the item within seconds' possible without shortening the poll interval. On media types, `application/atom+xml` is registered by RFC 4287 and JSON Feed 1.1 specifies `application/feed+json`, while `application/rss+xml` has never been registered with IANA; it is served by convention and validators accept it.